Zaino and PPF

[paintshield]

Originally Posted by threesixtycs

Granted some installers are bound to be better than others and a lot of people do speak your praise!

And well done to your concours customers , even though they are technically cheating by entering a car with PPF on it!

That is a matter between the Owner and The Judge

Not my place to comment

[Carlylove]

Originally Posted by threesixtycs

Granted some installers are bound to be better than others and a lot of people do speak your praise!

And well done to your concours customers , even though they are technically cheating by entering a car with PPF on it!

I rarely post on this sort of issue in here as I am in the PPF trade but insinuating someone's customers are "technically cheating" because they have a product that protects paintwork from damage is absurd. By this rule you are insinuating that all paint should be pure and no waxes, sealants etc. should be on there as they are enhancing/protecting the true finish.

Let's face it the judges can see that there is film there and would mark accordingly or are they cheating also?

[threesixtycs]

Originally Posted by Carlylove

I rarely post on this sort of issue in here as I am in the PPF trade but insinuating someone's customers are "technically cheating" because they have a product that protects paintwork from damage is absurd. By this rule you are insinuating that all paint should be pure and no waxes, sealants etc. should be on there as they are enhancing/protecting the true finish.

Let's face it the judges can see that there is film there and would mark accordingly or are they cheating also?

I'm not 'insinuating' that all paint should be pure and no waxes/sealants should be applied (as this is simply the preparation of an existing part of the car, what I am saying is that PPF on a car would constitute as a non-standard modification to the car, i.e. if it didn't leave the factory gates with the plastic on it, it shouldn't be there in a concours competition - and if it is, the car should be penalised just as heavily as if the car had a set of non-standard rims, badges, stickers, brake hoses or what have you.

In fairness, cheating was maybe too hard a word to have used, some judges may not notice that a car has PPF, and by Tom exclaiming that some of his customers have won concours competitions with his film on, I think that is what he is getting at - which is a credit to his installers skills, but not a credit to the owners of cars who knowingly enter to win with perfect (non-standard) paintwork.

I hope this clears up my argument.

http://www.pressbox.co.uk/detailed/A...sed_40058.html

"VentureShield® is a new breed of paint protection for the car market with its non-yellowing UV stable properties and a never seen before level of optical clarity it is difficult to tell if it is even on the vehicle."

As a concours entrant, it is something I feel very strongly about that a car should be presented in it's best possible original form, and when items need to be replaced, they should be done so where possible with an original Ferrari part. So to me, entering a car in concours is maybe not 'cheating', but is certainly deceitful and against the nature of the day out.

[Carlylove]

"I hope this clears up my argument.

http://www.pressbox.co.uk/detailed/A...sed_40058.html

"VentureShield® is a new breed of paint protection for the car market with its non-yellowing UV stable properties and a never seen before level of optical clarity it is difficult to tell if it is even on the vehicle."

As a concours entrant, it is something I feel very strongly about that a car should be presented in it's best possible original form, and when items need to be replaced, they should be done so where possible with an original Ferrari part. So to me, entering a car in concours is maybe not 'cheating', but is certainly deceitful and against the nature of the day out."

I think it does anything but clear up your argument and finding a press release explaining the qualities of the product hardly make it cheating or clever for finding as it is in the public domain.

I would be interested in your thoughts on options being added to a vehicle as VentureShield is now a dealer option so does that make any DO car owner "deceitful and against the nature of the day out" if they concours it?

[threesixtycs]

Originally Posted by Carlylove

"I hope this clears up my argument.

http://www.pressbox.co.uk/detailed/A...sed_40058.html

"VentureShield® is a new breed of paint protection for the car market with its non-yellowing UV stable properties and a never seen before level of optical clarity it is difficult to tell if it is even on the vehicle."

As a concours entrant, it is something I feel very strongly about that a car should be presented in it's best possible original form, and when items need to be replaced, they should be done so where possible with an original Ferrari part. So to me, entering a car in concours is maybe not 'cheating', but is certainly deceitful and against the nature of the day out."

I think it does anything but clear up your argument and finding a press release explaining the qualities of the product hardly make it cheating or clever for finding as it is in the public domain.

I would be interested in your thoughts on options being added to a vehicle as VentureShield is now a dealer option so does that make any DO car owner "deceitful and against the nature of the day out" if they concours it?

I never intended it to be clever, I intended the post to show that one of VentureShields selling points is the fact it's difficult to see on paintwork

Dealer option or not, if I can't put my finger on a body panel and touch paint, i.e. not plastic, not a wrap, just paint, be it enhanced with a sealant or a wax, it's non-standard.

If the owner walks up to the judge on the day and says "My car has paint protection film on it" then fair play - my gripe is, they don't.

[stats007]

Originally Posted by Carlylove

I would be interested in your thoughts on options being added to a vehicle as VentureShield is now a dealer option so does that make any DO car owner "deceitful and against the nature of the day out" if they concours it?

Dealer options are the not the same as factory options. They offer it because they make a tidy profit - as they do with Supaguard/Permaguard/DiamondBrite etc.

[threesixtycs]

Originally Posted by stats007

Dealer options are the not the same as factory options. They offer it because they make a tidy profit - as they do with Supaguard/Permaguard/DiamondBrite etc.

[caspian575]

Tom

If I have the right end of the stick............

I posted a comment earlier in this thread from Sal Zaino when I asked him about his product on PPF. I used his Z2 system on my Tour De France Bleu Ferrari 575 for nearly 3 years with no ill effect. The PPF was Ventureshield and pretty much undetectable unless you knew what you were looking for. As for reflectance differences between the PPF and the original paint...there were none. Based on my experience with the venturesheild I decided in February that I would have Paintshield wrap the complete front, roof and A pillars on my Black Ferrari 599.

The film you used is Xpel and there is a significant difference between the original paint finish and the finish on the PPF, the Xpel when compared to OEM paint and the venture shield for that matter seems to have a much more defined orange peel effect which upsets me a little if I am honest. Of course the car is black and that doesn't help!

I have some customer feedback which I would be happy to share with you on a Private Mail or Phonecall relative to the above if you are interested?

The installation you guys did is to say the least superb, it too is almost impossible to detect unless you know what you are looking for. Praise where praise is due your guys know what they are doing.

The issue then comes down, "what do I polish the PPF with? And what do I keep away from?"

My view is this.

I have a car that cost significantly more than 5 digits. During the purchase process I decided that I wanted to protect its paintwork from stone chips for no other reason than they spoil the aesthetic appearance of any car no matter what the value. I weighed up my option, "do I drive around for a year with ugly chips before spending 4k on a respray - only to be back to square one 20 minutes in to my first journey?" No obviously not, repainting is not an option. So I go the PPF route.

So here I am with my 6 digit car that has a PPF wrap and I am out in the cold with regards to what to treat it with. The internet is a great tool but all my research has told me is "what not to use" I cannot find any notification that says, "you are safe to use XYZ on our films"

I used Zaino on my 575 and had fabulous results, awesome I would say. Was I lucky? I am not using it on my 599 because of your warning. I opted to follow your lead and use a Carnuba...but is it right? Is this a potential hand grenade? Am I looking at a potential problem in a year or two time when I come back to you with a yellow film and you ask, "what did you polish it with? I say Carnuba from ABC and you say, "ah, there you go should not have used it!"

I think for all PPF users it would be nice if the PPF OEM's would walk up to the plate and say "we recommend THIS" or "that we have tried the following sealants and waxes and have found no ill effects under accelerated conditions" Is it up to the end user to define what works and what doesn't?

I spent years in architectural coatings industry. I saw polyester powder coatings come into vogue in the 80's and saw them chalk and fail just as fast. PPG, Akzo and many others spent millions on researching coating systems that could stand UV and the test of time. So I ask why is it that 3M (especially with their resourses) or the producers of Xpel cannot tell us what is OK to use?

I wonder if you would have any high end car business if your OEM suppliers cited, "these films once applied should never be polished with anything as they may cause the film to under perform"

My car will be due to be sealed or waxed in May - what do I use?

Roger

[paintshield]

HI Roger sorry for the time it has taken me to reply, I have been out of the business ill for about ten weeks.

The issue with certain products is limited to a specific set of components contained in some (by no means all) aftermarket cleaning products we should have issued you with an aftercare instruction sheet but I would welcome a phonecall just to run through this with you.

As I mentioned earlier on in the thread the issue is NOT a brand related issue it is more a case of a reaction with any PPF indeed we used to have a wall of various brands illustrating the issue.

Now whilst ANY reputable organisation will offer a no yellowing warranty (which should correct the problem should it occur) it makes more sense all round to head the problem off by eliminating the cause.

The fact is that in lab tests and in yellowing and fading tests in places like the nevada desert none of the products will yellow if left to their own devices.

The reality is of course this is not the world most vehicles inhabit.

A decent Wax like a swissvax or Zymol (or similar) will cause no issues.

Bear in mind however that the wax itself as it ages will hold contaminants and ultimately discolour, this can sometimes be more apparrent on the film due to the pores holding more of the older wax.

The solution to that is simple strip the old wax off and start with a fresh coat.

None of this is a big deal. Chemical coating products that contain solvents (often used as sealants on film) can themselves be the cause of an issue if not selected carefully by an installer.

In most cases these issues can usually be rectified without replacing the film, obviously if a film is left too long without corrective action then a problem CAN occur that may require replacing the film, however as it is covered under warranty a reputable organisation will deal with it that way.

On the subject of film stocks and personal preferences on film, we have several brands of film we can use. The only caveat I apply is if a SPECIFIC film brand is requested I reserve the right to not offer parts of our warranty on that film if I am not confident it will survive suffeciently well to be able to offer our extended warranty.

I am referring specifically to the NO failure aspect of our warranty which guarantees replacement in the remote likelihood something gets through.

As long as a customer is happy that I will reduce certain aspects of the warrany then if they want "Brand X" for the sake of arguement, I have no problems fitting it.

We offer Orange peel free premium films which I have (and are happy to continueto) fitted to numerous cars on here and elsewhere.

If a client doesnt raise the issue with the installers or the girls on the phone then a standard film is what will be offered and priced for ( the same is true of other installers of other film brands incidentally).

I will PM you my mobile number in case I am out of the business when you call.


Best wishes Tom

Footnote On the Concours discussion above suffice it to say how interesting it is that a simple observation on the winning of concourse classes should result in an extensive exchange. I tend to agree intuitively with the poster who felt it surprising it got through. I was also surprised, I guess the fact that they were flawless installs in a premium film meant it wasnt detectable

Either that or the "Ref" needed new specs